Hayley Doyle Dr. Fogelman EDC 250H 17 November 2015 In What Ways Are Teachers Restricted By Scripted Curriculums? Source One - Personal Account Article (from Education Leadership) Summary: Denise Gelberg, a first grade teacher with thirty years of teaching experience, shares her personal classroom experiences to make the argument that maximum learning occurs when teachers combine scripted curriculums with teacher autonomy. Ms. Gelberg credits a lot of her success to the reading programs (Distar Reader and Basal Reader) that were introduced to her her first year of teaching. She continues to explain that as time went on, she was able to pull out the most useful aspects of the programs and use them with individual students who benefitted from it. With some students, she only used a few scripted lessons, because they learned better when the curriculum was less structured. With other students, she would use every single scripted lesson, because they needed structured daily routines to learn. However, she did say that her principals with whom she worked with gave her the freedom that she needed to do this, which went a long way. She was provided with the scripted material, but was not required to use it with every student. Reaction: In my opinion, Ms. Gelberg showed us all that there is no need to “choose a side.” It is quite possible to like scripted curriculums, but not love them. The key to her success was the freedom given to her by her principals. That freedom preserved her autonomy and allowed her to adjust and readjust the classroom in order to fit the individual needs of her students. It provided her with a solid base, but also gave her wiggle room. This idea may be the key to many classrooms in Rhode Island. Teachers need guidelines and first year teachers obviously need some sort of instruction. However, the key is that administration allows the teachers to stray from the strict curriculum if they think that they can teach it a better way. This approach should maximize personal learning, as it allows teachers to adapt the material to fit the needs of each individual student. Gelberg, D. (2008). Scripted Curriculum: Scourge or Salvation? Education Leadership, 65(6), 80–82. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.uri.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=0ad3abcd-edd4-4d9e-9858-3e1355f56268%40sessionmgr4005&vid=4&hid=4106
Source Two - Magazine (Time Magazine) Summary: This article aims to compare both the positive and negative aspects of scripted curriculums, and to determine which classroom structures are most effective. Morse first points out that in classrooms such as those in Harold Washington Elementary in Chicago, scripted curriculums can turn an urban, poor school maintained by security guards into structured and orderly classrooms. Chicago’s structured curriculum is extremely controversial, and is currently voluntary. However, El-Roy Estes (fourth grade teacher) argues that it is extremely useful for new teachers, because it provides them with everything that they need to know; the thinking is done for them (Morse, Blackman, & Grace, 2000). Additionally, many scripted curriculums have been proven to increase test scores, which is appealing to parents. Many parents prefer to know exactly what their child is being taught, and know that what they are learning is worthwhile. There is a certain degree of safety in knowing that the methods of teaching have been used before and deemed successful. Furthermore, in a way, the scripted curriculums are “fool-proof.” The article brings up Nadine Broadus, a physical education teacher with no experience in teaching reading. But, with the scripted program, she says that she didn't have a choice, and was able to teach reading because all of the information was right there in front of her. But then if everyone can do it, why have people study to be teachers at all? Linda McNeil (professor of education at Rice University) argues that such programs are only going to drive the good teachers away and give the poor teachers a place to hide. Another negative aspect of scripted materials is that these pre-set curriculums takes away a lot of the creativity of the teacher, as well as the creativity of the students. Alfie Kohn (author of The Schools Our Children Deserve) points out that such curriculums only teach the students to spit back the information that is thrown at them. Furthermore, scripted curriculums are expensive, and oftentimes, are too expensive to keep running. Overall, it is evident that scripted curriculums are a controversial topic because although they serve as a safety net in schools, they lack the essential creative piece that many find necessary in an education. Reaction: One of the aspects that people like about scripted curriculums is that the parents know exactly what their children are being taught in the classroom. This implies that parents are sometimes totally removed from the classroom. To fix this, Rhode Island school systems could try to send out more frequent newsletters explaining to the parents what is going on within the walls of the school. Scripted curriculums should not be the only way to keep parents in the loop. Additionally, I think that administrators need to be careful when presenting scripted materials to the teaching staff. It must be made clear that these curriculums do not undermine the intelligence of the teacher, or try to replace them. Clearly, many teachers see them as threats to their autonomy when rather, they should see them as tools to help their classroom run smoother. Therefore, it may be more successful if they are presented as “teaching tools” rather than “scripted curriculums.”
Source Three - Journal Article (The Clearing House) Summary: In this article, author Brooke B. Eisenbach tries to answer the question “How do educators balance out personal beliefs and the mandated curriculum?” by interviewing three middle school teachers. Many teachers feel that such strict curriculums make the job less enjoyable, as it limits their options and creative thinking. Others find it offensive, and believe that the scripted material was mandated because educators were not trusted enough. They seem to underestimate the intelligence levels of educators. The three middle school teachers that were interviewed all had very different reactions. Mrs. Lewis, an eighth grade language arts teacher, states that she doesn't think that the scripted material is all bad, but she would rather teach using the ideas and tactics that she learned in college. Additionally, when asked if she misses teaching her own lessons, she responded, “Do I miss my own lessons? Absolutely! I especially miss my poetry unit.” (Eisenbach, 2012). Mrs. Martinez (also an eighth grade language arts teacher) says that she doesn't necessarily agree with the scripted curriculum, but some of it can be useful. She chose to use the basics of the script and then make it her own. For example, she would take an activity that was supposed to be written on standard lined-paper, and turned it into a creative project in which the students created mini-booklets. However, Mr. Morris rejected the scripted curriculum completely, and is extremely open about it. He believes that as a veteran teacher, he knows how to teach his students, and to be forced to conform to a completely different teaching style is simply wrong. So, the question still remains: how do we successfully balance scripted curriculums and teacher creativity? The article comes to the conclusion that teachers have a duty to do their best to serve the needs of each student, whatever that may entail. However, they must always be at least mindful of the policies that the National Education Association has put in place. Reaction: This article shows us that various teachers are responding to the idea of scripted curriculums in various ways. It seems as if newer teachers are more open to the idea, while veteran teachers see it as a negative thing, and reject the idea completely. In my opinion, the key take away from this article is that scripted curriculums should not dominate the entire school day. There needs to be room for the ideas of individual teachers, and there should be time for someone like Mrs. Lewis to teach her poetry unit. In Rhode Island, a good way to test out scripted curriculums may be to divide up the day. Half of the school day could be dedicated to reviewing the mandated material, and the second half of the day could be left up to the teacher. Of course, whatever the teacher chooses to do should have some relevance to what the class in learning with the scripted material. The key seems to be balance. Obviously, it isn't easy, but dividing up the school day may be a good start.
Eisenbach, B., B. (2012). Teacher Belief and Practice in a Scripted Curriculum. The Clearing House, 85(4), 153–154.
Source Four - Reputable Website (Tolerance.org) Summary: Overall, this article points out the fact that although scripted curriculums can limit a teacher's’ autonomy and clash with his or her own personal belief system, there are still ways to teach what he or she desires. After moving from a school district that allowed an extreme amount of teacher freedom to a school district that ran strictly off scripted materials, Ms. Allison Ricket found her passion for teaching decreasing. As much as she loved teaching, she even went as far as to consider leaving because she could not incorporate her passion for social justice into her high school curriculum. However, she sat down with her students to gather their thoughts, and came to the conclusion that there are other ways to promote social justice. She hung posters around the classroom, and confronted students that she saw bullying other students in the hallway. One student in particular even stated that he felt the safest in her classroom. Ms. Ricket points out the fact that I teachers are always being looked up to by their students, during the lesson or not. Sometimes, teaching by example is just as effective, if not more effective, than teaching in the classroom. Although scripted curriculums often challenge teachers’ ideals and subdue their passion, they should not be the end of the world, because a good teacher is worth far more than the material that they teach. Reaction: Here, we see the danger of forcing scripted material upon teachers who have taught for years without it. Some of these veteran teachers see it as a personal attack on their autonomy and, subsequently minimizes their passion for teaching. In my opinion, no teacher should just have something like this forced upon them after successfully teaching for years. In RHode Island, it may be a good idea to let veteran teachers opt out of new, strict curriculums. They should still be presented with the materials and given the opportunity to use them if they desire, but they should not be forced to completely change their teaching styles.
Source Five - Editorial Summary: This article focuses on the controversy surrounding teaching english, because of its subjectivity. Current forms of assessment such as standardized tests test literature mechanics and mathematical models. It seems as if the creative aspect of learning is slipping out of the cracks is taking a backseat to these types of tests. The tests and the strategies needed to pass them are driving the curriculum, and teachers are being forced to “teach to the test” rather than promote creative investigations of literature. In order to bring back creative learning, teachers’ autonomy need to be prioritized, for it is the creative minds of teachers that activate the creative minds of students By being an “activist” teacher, teachers can challenge the state regulated curriculums, and give a new name to the teaching profession. Reaction: There are certain aspects of education, one of them being literature, that can only be taught through the creative minds of teachers. This is why we need human beings to teach our children, rather than machines. Most students learn through imitation. If they watch their teachers think deeply, interpret, and reflect on the material in front of them, then they are likely to do the same. It is no secret that creative thinking is a huge part of learning, and it is up to the teachers to keep it alive in the classroom, despite what the state is mandating. It is crucial that Rhode Island schools do whatever they can to keep creative learning alive. However, this is mostly up to the teachers themselves, rather than the state. Individual teachers need to encourage their students to ask questions on a daily basis, try to find real-world applications in the material, and to voice their own opinions. It may be useful for administrative figures to sit in on classes and make sure that teachers are promoting this kind of thinking.
Through my research, I learned that the key to successfully using scripted curriculums is balancing it with creative thinking. However, before that can even be attempted, teachers need to be granted a certain degree of freedom in their classrooms. Administrators need to trust the fact that they are well-qualified and have been taught the best ways to educate our nation's youth. Once that is established, the key is figuring out which pieces of the scripted curriculum are the most effective, and worth the time. This may differ from student to student. The best teachers base their lesson plans off of the scripted material given to them, and, over the years, modify it to fit their particular classrooms. This needs to be combined with a promotion of creative thinking and individual interpretations of ideas. In addition to learning the scripted material required by the state and trying to pass the standardized tests, a good education includes self-development. This is done through trial and error, asking questions, and discovering passions. Oftentimes, the scripted curriculums leave little or no room for this, so it is important that we make sure that it doesn't disappear completely from the classroom.
How does this research help us identify or refine a strategy to improve schools in Rhode Island?
One of the most important things that Rhode Island schools can does to recognize the fact that teachers are qualified to do what they do. The strictness of administration staff should be minimized, and teachers should have more room to autonomously decide how to run their classrooms. However, that being said, bad teachers do in fact exist. To prevent that, it may prove necessary to have administration members, specifically the school principal, sit in on some classes to ensure that the students are in fact learning what they need to, if this is not already being done. One last thing that Rhode Island schools needs to be careful of is not forcing new scripted curriculums upon veteran teachers. It simply is not fair to force teachers who have been teaching for thirty years to change their entire classroom structure with the snap of a finger. The best way to present the scripted material is to offer it, but not demand that the teacher use it. The teachers should be asked before the materials are bought, because they are in fact expensive. The teachers know a great deal about the best way that their students learn, and they are qualified to make such a decision. This would promote teacher autonomy while also providing them with the access to useful educational tools if they wish to use them.
Author: Hayley Doyle
https://docs.google.com/a/my.uri.edu/document/d/1ZnFBP40cYNkFBu0qyU958Nc5h55vBK-tINt4a8uqAU0/edit?usp=sharing
Hayley Doyle
Dr. Fogelman
EDC 250H
17 November 2015
In What Ways Are Teachers Restricted By Scripted Curriculums?
Source One - Personal Account Article (from Education Leadership)
Summary: Denise Gelberg, a first grade teacher with thirty years of teaching experience, shares her personal classroom experiences to make the argument that maximum learning occurs when teachers combine scripted curriculums with teacher autonomy. Ms. Gelberg credits a lot of her success to the reading programs (Distar Reader and Basal Reader) that were introduced to her her first year of teaching. She continues to explain that as time went on, she was able to pull out the most useful aspects of the programs and use them with individual students who benefitted from it. With some students, she only used a few scripted lessons, because they learned better when the curriculum was less structured. With other students, she would use every single scripted lesson, because they needed structured daily routines to learn. However, she did say that her principals with whom she worked with gave her the freedom that she needed to do this, which went a long way. She was provided with the scripted material, but was not required to use it with every student.
Reaction: In my opinion, Ms. Gelberg showed us all that there is no need to “choose a side.” It is quite possible to like scripted curriculums, but not love them. The key to her success was the freedom given to her by her principals. That freedom preserved her autonomy and allowed her to adjust and readjust the classroom in order to fit the individual needs of her students. It provided her with a solid base, but also gave her wiggle room. This idea may be the key to many classrooms in Rhode Island. Teachers need guidelines and first year teachers obviously need some sort of instruction. However, the key is that administration allows the teachers to stray from the strict curriculum if they think that they can teach it a better way. This approach should maximize personal learning, as it allows teachers to adapt the material to fit the needs of each individual student.
Gelberg, D. (2008). Scripted Curriculum: Scourge or Salvation? Education Leadership, 65(6), 80–82. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.uri.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=0ad3abcd-edd4-4d9e-9858-3e1355f56268%40sessionmgr4005&vid=4&hid=4106
Source Two - Magazine (Time Magazine)
Summary: This article aims to compare both the positive and negative aspects of scripted curriculums, and to determine which classroom structures are most effective. Morse first points out that in classrooms such as those in Harold Washington Elementary in Chicago, scripted curriculums can turn an urban, poor school maintained by security guards into structured and orderly classrooms. Chicago’s structured curriculum is extremely controversial, and is currently voluntary. However, El-Roy Estes (fourth grade teacher) argues that it is extremely useful for new teachers, because it provides them with everything that they need to know; the thinking is done for them (Morse, Blackman, & Grace, 2000). Additionally, many scripted curriculums have been proven to increase test scores, which is appealing to parents. Many parents prefer to know exactly what their child is being taught, and know that what they are learning is worthwhile. There is a certain degree of safety in knowing that the methods of teaching have been used before and deemed successful. Furthermore, in a way, the scripted curriculums are “fool-proof.” The article brings up Nadine Broadus, a physical education teacher with no experience in teaching reading. But, with the scripted program, she says that she didn't have a choice, and was able to teach reading because all of the information was right there in front of her. But then if everyone can do it, why have people study to be teachers at all? Linda McNeil (professor of education at Rice University) argues that such programs are only going to drive the good teachers away and give the poor teachers a place to hide. Another negative aspect of scripted materials is that these pre-set curriculums takes away a lot of the creativity of the teacher, as well as the creativity of the students. Alfie Kohn (author of The Schools Our Children Deserve) points out that such curriculums only teach the students to spit back the information that is thrown at them. Furthermore, scripted curriculums are expensive, and oftentimes, are too expensive to keep running. Overall, it is evident that scripted curriculums are a controversial topic because although they serve as a safety net in schools, they lack the essential creative piece that many find necessary in an education.
Reaction: One of the aspects that people like about scripted curriculums is that the parents know exactly what their children are being taught in the classroom. This implies that parents are sometimes totally removed from the classroom. To fix this, Rhode Island school systems could try to send out more frequent newsletters explaining to the parents what is going on within the walls of the school. Scripted curriculums should not be the only way to keep parents in the loop. Additionally, I think that administrators need to be careful when presenting scripted materials to the teaching staff. It must be made clear that these curriculums do not undermine the intelligence of the teacher, or try to replace them. Clearly, many teachers see them as threats to their autonomy when rather, they should see them as tools to help their classroom run smoother. Therefore, it may be more successful if they are presented as “teaching tools” rather than “scripted curriculums.”
Morse, J., Blackman, A., & Grace, J. (2000, March 6). Sticking to the Script. Time, 155(9). Retrieved from __http://web.b.ebscohost.com.uri.idm.oclc.org/ehost/detail/detail?sid=b8cab245-b84e-49d2-8b5b-cccb8bc9dac2%40sessionmgr110&vid=5&hid=102&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=2827413&db=ulh__
Source Three - Journal Article (The Clearing House)
Summary: In this article, author Brooke B. Eisenbach tries to answer the question “How do educators balance out personal beliefs and the mandated curriculum?” by interviewing three middle school teachers. Many teachers feel that such strict curriculums make the job less enjoyable, as it limits their options and creative thinking. Others find it offensive, and believe that the scripted material was mandated because educators were not trusted enough. They seem to underestimate the intelligence levels of educators. The three middle school teachers that were interviewed all had very different reactions.
Mrs. Lewis, an eighth grade language arts teacher, states that she doesn't think that the scripted material is all bad, but she would rather teach using the ideas and tactics that she learned in college. Additionally, when asked if she misses teaching her own lessons, she responded, “Do I miss my own lessons? Absolutely! I especially miss my poetry unit.” (Eisenbach, 2012). Mrs. Martinez (also an eighth grade language arts teacher) says that she doesn't necessarily agree with the scripted curriculum, but some of it can be useful. She chose to use the basics of the script and then make it her own. For example, she would take an activity that was supposed to be written on standard lined-paper, and turned it into a creative project in which the students created mini-booklets. However, Mr. Morris rejected the scripted curriculum completely, and is extremely open about it. He believes that as a veteran teacher, he knows how to teach his students, and to be forced to conform to a completely different teaching style is simply wrong. So, the question still remains: how do we successfully balance scripted curriculums and teacher creativity? The article comes to the conclusion that teachers have a duty to do their best to serve the needs of each student, whatever that may entail. However, they must always be at least mindful of the policies that the National Education Association has put in place.
Reaction: This article shows us that various teachers are responding to the idea of scripted curriculums in various ways. It seems as if newer teachers are more open to the idea, while veteran teachers see it as a negative thing, and reject the idea completely. In my opinion, the key take away from this article is that scripted curriculums should not dominate the entire school day. There needs to be room for the ideas of individual teachers, and there should be time for someone like Mrs. Lewis to teach her poetry unit. In Rhode Island, a good way to test out scripted curriculums may be to divide up the day. Half of the school day could be dedicated to reviewing the mandated material, and the second half of the day could be left up to the teacher. Of course, whatever the teacher chooses to do should have some relevance to what the class in learning with the scripted material. The key seems to be balance. Obviously, it isn't easy, but dividing up the school day may be a good start.
Eisenbach, B., B. (2012). Teacher Belief and Practice in a Scripted Curriculum. The Clearing House, 85(4), 153–154.
Source Four - Reputable Website (Tolerance.org)
Summary: Overall, this article points out the fact that although scripted curriculums can limit a teacher's’ autonomy and clash with his or her own personal belief system, there are still ways to teach what he or she desires. After moving from a school district that allowed an extreme amount of teacher freedom to a school district that ran strictly off scripted materials, Ms. Allison Ricket found her passion for teaching decreasing. As much as she loved teaching, she even went as far as to consider leaving because she could not incorporate her passion for social justice into her high school curriculum. However, she sat down with her students to gather their thoughts, and came to the conclusion that there are other ways to promote social justice. She hung posters around the classroom, and confronted students that she saw bullying other students in the hallway. One student in particular even stated that he felt the safest in her classroom. Ms. Ricket points out the fact that I teachers are always being looked up to by their students, during the lesson or not. Sometimes, teaching by example is just as effective, if not more effective, than teaching in the classroom. Although scripted curriculums often challenge teachers’ ideals and subdue their passion, they should not be the end of the world, because a good teacher is worth far more than the material that they teach.
Reaction: Here, we see the danger of forcing scripted material upon teachers who have taught for years without it. Some of these veteran teachers see it as a personal attack on their autonomy and, subsequently minimizes their passion for teaching. In my opinion, no teacher should just have something like this forced upon them after successfully teaching for years. In RHode Island, it may be a good idea to let veteran teachers opt out of new, strict curriculums. They should still be presented with the materials and given the opportunity to use them if they desire, but they should not be forced to completely change their teaching styles.
Ricket, A. (2014, January 12). Teaching Around the Script. Retrieved from http://www.tolerance.org/blog/teaching-around-script
Source Five - Editorial
Summary: This article focuses on the controversy surrounding teaching english, because of its subjectivity. Current forms of assessment such as standardized tests test literature mechanics and mathematical models. It seems as if the creative aspect of learning is slipping out of the cracks is taking a backseat to these types of tests. The tests and the strategies needed to pass them are driving the curriculum, and teachers are being forced to “teach to the test” rather than promote creative investigations of literature. In order to bring back creative learning, teachers’ autonomy need to be prioritized, for it is the creative minds of teachers that activate the creative minds of students By being an “activist” teacher, teachers can challenge the state regulated curriculums, and give a new name to the teaching profession.
Reaction: There are certain aspects of education, one of them being literature, that can only be taught through the creative minds of teachers. This is why we need human beings to teach our children, rather than machines. Most students learn through imitation. If they watch their teachers think deeply, interpret, and reflect on the material in front of them, then they are likely to do the same. It is no secret that creative thinking is a huge part of learning, and it is up to the teachers to keep it alive in the classroom, despite what the state is mandating. It is crucial that Rhode Island schools do whatever they can to keep creative learning alive. However, this is mostly up to the teachers themselves, rather than the state. Individual teachers need to encourage their students to ask questions on a daily basis, try to find real-world applications in the material, and to voice their own opinions. It may be useful for administrative figures to sit in on classes and make sure that teachers are promoting this kind of thinking.
Styles, M. (2002). Editorial. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(3). Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.uri.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=b7770504-576f-453d-bdab-cad4137d940c%40sessionmgr4004&vid=10&hid=4106
Overall Reaction to Your Research
Through my research, I learned that the key to successfully using scripted curriculums is balancing it with creative thinking. However, before that can even be attempted, teachers need to be granted a certain degree of freedom in their classrooms. Administrators need to trust the fact that they are well-qualified and have been taught the best ways to educate our nation's youth. Once that is established, the key is figuring out which pieces of the scripted curriculum are the most effective, and worth the time. This may differ from student to student. The best teachers base their lesson plans off of the scripted material given to them, and, over the years, modify it to fit their particular classrooms. This needs to be combined with a promotion of creative thinking and individual interpretations of ideas. In addition to learning the scripted material required by the state and trying to pass the standardized tests, a good education includes self-development. This is done through trial and error, asking questions, and discovering passions. Oftentimes, the scripted curriculums leave little or no room for this, so it is important that we make sure that it doesn't disappear completely from the classroom.How does this research help us identify or refine a strategy to improve schools in Rhode Island?
One of the most important things that Rhode Island schools can does to recognize the fact that teachers are qualified to do what they do. The strictness of administration staff should be minimized, and teachers should have more room to autonomously decide how to run their classrooms. However, that being said, bad teachers do in fact exist. To prevent that, it may prove necessary to have administration members, specifically the school principal, sit in on some classes to ensure that the students are in fact learning what they need to, if this is not already being done. One last thing that Rhode Island schools needs to be careful of is not forcing new scripted curriculums upon veteran teachers. It simply is not fair to force teachers who have been teaching for thirty years to change their entire classroom structure with the snap of a finger. The best way to present the scripted material is to offer it, but not demand that the teacher use it. The teachers should be asked before the materials are bought, because they are in fact expensive. The teachers know a great deal about the best way that their students learn, and they are qualified to make such a decision. This would promote teacher autonomy while also providing them with the access to useful educational tools if they wish to use them.